Ah, I understand. Thank you.

That’s a decent example of what I’ve been saying - basing a conclusion like that on the wording of an uncited press statement is pretty spurious. There simply may have been more reasons and this was judged the easiest to explain (which happens frequently), and without more information we aren’t simply equipped to make an informed judgement. Much as he wasn’t when he made the initial decision (but we admittedly court far less severe consequences)